Here is the original post by dunga:

"Each team will have 2 players playing strategic 1v1 and strategic 2v2 (a total of 6 games at 1 point worth each victory)
Each team will have 3 players playing Europe 3v3 games (2 games at 2 point worth each victory).
Each team will have 2 or 4 more players to play the 7v7 games, and more players to sit as reserves are allowed."

Obviously we switched to 5v5 instead of 7v7. But there it says two matches of 2v2 and 3v3 each. So I guess you have the option of just doing a rematch with the same teams. That seems pointless to me. Either only do a single matchup in each, or require a completely different set of teams in 2v2 and 3v3.

If that is the case, then yes the limit needs to be 6 games instead of 5.

LMAO, I just noticed I copied that from the 2012 thread. Oops, but it does say same format.

Still, 5 games max isn't an issue, it just means you'd need 15 slots covered by 4+other people. That isn't a lot to ask of other people to play 4 games each.

4 1v1 matchs, 2 player required
2 2v2 matchs, 2 or 4 player required
2 3v2 matchs, 3 or 6 player required
1 5v5 matchs, 5 player required.

total 9 match, 19 slot for player. total 15 points, 8 for win.
if there are no limit, one player can play:
2 1v1 games(same player cannot play 4 games, this was already rule of 2012)
2 2v2 games
2 3v3 games
1 5v5 games
so 7 games.
you want limit? ok, to 6.
5 is too hard to manage to get for a nation with only 5 player:
menas that 2 player play 5 games, and other 3 player 3 games everyone. Very hard. I know some player want play only 1 games, and if they have more free time they are ok for 2 games, but is hard get 2x5 games and 3x3 games :(
If you do this, small nation will cannot play.

Why limit it? It's fine the way it is and it's not worth a big debate or vote on it in my opinion.

Well, you can have more than 5 players though. Assuming some people only want to play the 5v5 and 3v3, and you only have 5 people, that means you could do this:

1v1 - A & B
2v2 - AB & CD
3v3 - ABC & DEF
5v5 - ABCDEF

Total games:
A - 5
B - 5
C - 5
D - 5
E - 2
F - 2

Or use a 6th player (just to play a couple games) and you have...

1v1 - A & B
2v2 - AB & CG
3v3 - ABC & EFG
5v5 - ABCDEF

Total games:
A - 5
B - 5
C - 4
D - 4
E - 2
F - 2
G - 2

I'm OK with the 6 game max though. But that would mean that player is on two teams in either 2s or 3s. Why the rule (to not play all games) for 1s but not 2s and 3s?

@JSA: I guess I don't really care, I'm just trying to understand why a person is allowed to play multiple slots in team games when that wasn't allowed in solo play. Really, it depends on what the intent of the contest is. Is this team "Nation X" or team "Player X" (where the person puppets the team)?

Is the goal to see how strong a small group is, or to measure how the best player can do steering the team?

I guess I am confused because it seemed like we set the limit at 4 games per person here:

http://warlight.net/Forum/Thread?ThreadID=6221&Offset=180

Even you were agreeing with it Gnuff.

And when we talk about a limit of 5 in the current thread, all of a sudden that is hard/unfair. I'm just confused because I thought the rules had already been finalized. I just need to know what Dunga wants, because we might have to add additional teams for 2s and 3s.

imho it'd better if nobody was allowed to play in different teams of the same gametype.

How about this? We take out a 2v2, a 3v3, and make the 5v5 worth only 2 points? Then we don't have to worry about duplicate games.

naah - Warlight is not all about 1v1s.

yes - i know probably some troll will all of a sudden jump out of nowhere to brag about masterrace and stuff.. but the truth is - teamgames are as important as 1v1s in this game, and for many they are more.

yes i agree with jsa, with no limit.
But if a lot of player want limit, let's do 6 game/7.
make 5 will make big trouble for smaller team imho.

I agree with Fridge (no player should be able to play multiple slots in the same format). If that means reducing the 2s and 3s (like JSA said), so be it. I would think you'd be able to find enough to cover everything though (I showed examples). Do people not have a 6th person, or are they just unwilling to use them because they are not 'good enough'?

It looks like 2/3 of the teams have alternates already, and you are not required to use a 6th player either (you just need 3-4 people willing to play 5 games each).

I guess I am puzzled because in the signup thread we said 4 games max per person, and we got all these people to sign up then. So I just don't see where saying 5 games max (only 1 slot per format) is an issue. Everyone agreed to more strict rules already.

you don't need 6 people and neither you do need any reduction in number of games with my idea.. 5 is enough. you CAN have more, but don't have to.

You can also stagger games if load is a problem. For example, you do not have to play all 4 1v1s at the same time, they will take much less time than the 5v5. Or stagger a person playing in 1v1 and 2v2 so they are not all going on at the same time.

I just don't think the issue is finding people able to take those turns. The issue is that it forces people to use more of their team for more games (diluting the quality unless you are a deep team). If someone can show me an example of a team that won't be able to cover their games based on that rule, I'd like to see it.

4 1v1 matchs, 2 player required
2 2v2 matchs, 2 or 4 player required
2 3v2 matchs, 3 or 6 player required
1 5v5 matchs, 5 player required.

total 9 match, 19 slot for player. total 15 points, 8 for win.
if there are no limit, one player can play:
2 1v1 games(same player cannot play 4 games, this was already rule of 2012)
2 2v2 games
2 3v3 games
1 5v5 games
so 7 games.
you want limit? ok, to 6.
5 is too hard to manage to get for a nation with only 5 player:
menas that 2 player play 5 games, and other 3 player 3 games everyone. Very hard. I know some player want play only 1 games, and if they have more free time they are ok for 2 games, but is hard get 2x5 games and 3x3 games :(
If you do this, small nation will cannot play.

4 1v1= 4 points
2 2v2= 2 points
2 3v3= 4 points
1 5v5= 3 points

13 points total so 7 points for win.

Edited 11/21/2013 16:33:40

This is the first time that I am checking this, and Great Britain won' tbe able to pitch 3 teams if there are limits. We only have 5 on each team and 2 subs waiting in case people drop out. Our 1st team uses this format for the games (letters instead of names):
4 1v1 = 2 A + 2 B
2 2v2 = 1 AC + 1 BD
2 3v3 = 1 ACE + 1 BDE
1 5v5 = 1 ABCDE

Is this really such a problem or do we need to redo our teams again?

Well, your only issue in that setup would be player E on both 3v3s.

What if we allow subs to play for any team within your nation? So if you have two GB/Ireland subs, they can play for teams 1-3. But maybe if they play more than 2 games for a team in a round, then they are considered part of that team and no longer a sub?

That's not gonna work Chris. A player needs to play on one and only one team, not 2-3. There's no way to keep players from playing 2 3v3 games if the team has only 5 people. The best you can do is to limit 5 games per person but I personally don't like that idea.

I think a better solution is to drop a 3v3 match, since you cannot field two teams of 3 with 5 players unless you overlap. Otherwise you require a 6th member for each team.

I thought we were only doing a single 2v2 and a single 3v3 up until today, which is why I proposed limiting a player to 4 games max initially.